[governance] Action on Enhanced Cooperation, please
Parminder
parminder at itforchange.net
Sat Jan 13 06:42:14 EST 2007
Hi Jeanette
> As I said before, the letter should also mention the secretariat, which
> did the main work anyway. Is there any reason not to mention it?
My reasons were as follows:
1. The concerned line is just an opener for the substantial issue that
comes in later - a kind of soft-ner. If it were a doc where the substantial
issue was IGC's comments on IGF etc it would be different.
2. the main import of the line is to refer to Nitin desai's personal
leadership in IGF before we take him up on the trickier issue to follow. We
just add AG, to make it little more 'democratic'.
I know that the hardest part of the work is often done by the secretariats,
and their role mostly remains largely unsung.. However I am unable to take
this line of thinking so far as to believe that the 'main work' is done by
them. leadership counts for a lot. And in this case I thought it was very
important, and a key element. In any case as I said this line wasn't meant
to be our substantive comment on the conduct of the IGF but a eulogy to
nitin's leadership.
The changed line will read
A good amount of the credit for this goes to your personal leadership, and
that of your advisory team, as well as to the hard work put in by the
secretariat.
Is it fine.
Parminder
________________________________________________
Parminder Jeet Singh
IT for Change, Bangalore
Bridging Development Realities and Technological Possibilities
Tel: (+91-80) 2665 4134, 2653 6890
Fax: (+91-80) 4146 1055
www.ITforChange.net
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jeanette Hofmann [mailto:jeanette at wz-berlin.de]
> Sent: Saturday, January 13, 2007 4:36 PM
> To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Parminder
> Subject: Re: [governance] Action on Enhanced Cooperation, please
>
> As I said before, the letter should also mention the secretariat, which
> did the main work anyway. Is there any reason not to mention it?
> jeanette
>
>
> Parminder schrieb:
> > This is the text of the letter planned to be sent out.
> >
> > (starts)
> >
> > From the Civil Society Internet Governance Caucus
> >
> > To
> >
> > Nitin Desai
> > Special Advisor to the Secretary-General
> > United Nations
> >
> >
> > Dear Mr Desai
> >
> > Wishing you a happy and fulfilling 2007!
> >
> > The Civil Society Internet Governance Caucus (CS-IGC) would like to
> > congratulate you for the very successful first meeting of the Internet
> > Governance Forum. A good amount of the credit for this goes to your
> personal
> > leadership, and that of your advisory team.
> >
> > We are writing to you because we understand you were asked by the UN
> > Secretary General to begin informal consultations on how to start a
> process
> > of 'enhanced cooperation' on international public policy issues related
> to
> > the Internet.
> >
> > The CS-IGC would very much appreciate an update on progress and news of
> the
> > current state of play with respect to "enhanced cooperation." In
> particular,
> > we would welcome information on (a) any concrete measures taken so far,
> and
> > (b) the plans for involving civil society in the process as per the
> clear
> > mandate in paragraph 71 of the Tunis Agenda.
> >
> > Sincerely,
> >
> > Vittorio Bertola
> > and
> > Parminder Jeet Singh
> >
> > (On behalf of the Civil Society Internet Governance Caucus)
> >
> > (ends)
> >
> >
> > McTim, I have removed the reference to Tunis agenda in para 1 but not in
> > para 2. I think the issue is not just that Nitin knows it is there, but
> to
> > claim WSIS legitimacy for our demand.
> >
> > Avri, since brevity is the general style adopted, I haven't mentioned a
> call
> > for an open consultative process which is implied in the last line.
> >
> > And I haven't put 'secretariat' along with Nitin and AG because, well...
> it
> > becomes a bit long, and somewhat perfunctory.
> >
> > I will send it tomorrow evening, if there are no other comments, in pdf
> > format enclosed in an email to nitin.
> >
> > Pamrinder
> >
> > ________________________________________________
> > Parminder Jeet Singh
> > IT for Change, Bangalore
> > Bridging Development Realities and Technological Possibilities
> > Tel: (+91-80) 2665 4134, 2653 6890
> > Fax: (+91-80) 4146 1055
> > www.ITforChange.net
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Lee McKnight [mailto:LMcKnigh at syr.edu]
> >> Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2007 10:29 PM
> >> To: aizu at anr.org; Parminder; governance at lists.cpsr.org
> >> Cc: Adam Peake; Milton Mueller
> >> Subject: Re: [governance] Action on Enhanced Cooperation, please
> >>
> >> I'll second Izumi on the spelling out, and then closing/sending this
> >> out.
> >>
> >> Lee
> >>
> >> Prof. Lee W. McKnight
> >> School of Information Studies
> >> Syracuse University
> >> +1-315-443-6891office
> >> +1-315-278-4392 mobile
> >>
> >>>>> aizu at anr.org 1/11/2007 8:52 AM >>>
> >> Parminder, thanks for the further edit.
> >>
> >> I think we can send this now.
> >>
> >> One minor suggetion is to spell out IGC, and add Civil Society to
> >> make it clear, so "Civil Society Internet Governance Caucus (CS-IGC)
> >> would
> >> like to..." reads better.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >>
> >> izumi
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> 2007/1/11, Parminder <parminder at itforchange.net>:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> We still wait for more comments/ suggestions on the proposed letter
> >> to
> >>> Nitin
> >>> Desai on enhanced cooperation. Meanwhile, I have tried to pull the
> >> texts
> >>> proposed by Milton and Bill together. To this text I have added the
> >> fact
> >>> of
> >>> the mandate of the Tunis agenda in para 1 (para 2 from Bill already
> >> had
> >>> such
> >>> a mention)
> >>>
> >>> The proposed text is
> >>>
> >>> We are writing to you because we understand you were asked by the UN
> >>> Secretary General to begin informal consultations on how to start a
> >>> process
> >>> aimed at 'enhanced cooperation' on international public policy
> >> issues
> >>> related to the Internet, as required by the paragraph 71 of the
> >> Tunis
> >>> agenda.
> >>>
> >>> The IGC would very much appreciate an update on progress and news of
> >> the
> >>> current state of play with respect to "enhanced cooperation". In
> >>> particular,
> >>> we would welcome information on a)any concrete steps taken so far,
> >> like,
> >>> any
> >>> discussions and consultations that have been held with governments
> >> and
> >>> other
> >>> stakeholders on the substance and modalities of enhanced cooperation,
> >> and
> >>> b)
> >>> the plans for involving civil society in the process per the clear
> >> mandate
> >>> in paragraph 71.
> >>>
> >>> (ends)
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Parminder
> >>>
> >>> ________________________________________________
> >>> Parminder Jeet Singh
> >>> IT for Change, Bangalore
> >>> Bridging Development Realities and Technological Possibilities
> >>> Tel: (+91-80) 2665 4134, 2653 6890
> >>> Fax: (+91-80) 4146 1055
> >>> www.ITforChange.net
> >>>
> >>>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>> From: Adam Peake [mailto:ajp at glocom.ac.jp]
> >>>> Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2007 1:03 PM
> >>>> To: Parminder; 'Milton Mueller'; governance at lists.cpsr.org
> >>>> Subject: RE: [governance] Action on Enhanced Cooperation, please
> >>>>
> >>>> At 12:36 PM +0530 1/10/07, Parminder wrote:
> >>>>> > We are writing to you because we understand you were asked by
> >> the
> >>> UN
> >>>>>> Secretary General to begin informal consultations on how to
> >> start a
> >>>>>> process aimed at enhancing cooperation on international public
> >>> policy
> >>>>>> issues related to the Internet.
> >>>>> Is it generally known that Secy Gen did ask Nitin Desai to begin
> >>>>> consultation? ( I, for instance, did not know) Should we proceed
> >> from
> >>>>> this...
> >>>>
> >>>> Yes.
> >>>>
> >>>> UN press release announcing set up of the IGF secretariat and
> >> enhance
> >>>> cooperation
> >>>> <http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2006/sgsm10366.doc.htm>.
> >> Relevant
> >>>> part:
> >>>>
> >>>> "On a separate issue, the Secretary-General has also decided to
> >> ask
> >>>> Mr. Desai to consult informally on how to start a process aimed at
> >>>> enhancing cooperation on international public policy issues
> >> related
> >>>> to the Internet. The Summit had requested the Secretary-General
> >> to
> >>>> start such a process. "
> >>>>
> >>>> The words suggested for the question in the letter reflected this.
> >>>> (and also one reason I think just asking the simple question is
> >>>> best... but as said, more is OK if that's what all want.)
> >>>>
> >>>> Adam
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> Parminder
> >>>>>
> >>>>> ________________________________________________
> >>>>> Parminder Jeet Singh
> >>>>> IT for Change, Bangalore
> >>>>> Bridging Development Realities and Technological Possibilities
> >>>>> Tel: (+91-80) 2665 4134, 2653 6890
> >>>>> Fax: (+91-80) 4146 1055
> >>>>> www.ITforChange.net
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>>>> From: Milton Mueller [mailto:Mueller at syr.edu]
> >>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2007 7:53 PM
> >>>>>> To: ajp at glocom.ac.jp; parminder at itforchange.net;
> >>>> governance at lists.cpsr.org
> >>>>>> Subject: Re: [governance] Action on Enhanced Cooperation,
> >> please
> >>>>>> Parminder:
> >>>>>> Thank you for an extensive effort on this draft. Perhaps some
> >> of
> >>> the
> >>>>>> delay in getting there stemmed from what I think is your
> >>> overestimate
> >>>> of
> >>>>>> the amount of work required.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I really think in this case we need to be very concise and to
> >> the
> >>>>>> point. Something like,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> " Dear Nitin:
> >>>>>> <insert a line or two of pleasantries if you wish>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> We are writing to you because we understand you were asked by
> >> the UN
> >>>>>> Secretary General to begin informal consultations on how to
> >> start a
> >>>>>> process aimed at enhancing cooperation on international public
> >>> policy
> >>>>>> issues related to the Internet.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> The IGC would very much appreciated an update on progress and
> >> news
> >>> of
> >>>>>> the current state of play with respect to "enhanced
> >> cooperation."
> >>> What
> >>>>>> concrete measures have been taken and what role is contemplated
> >> for
> >>>>>> civil society in them?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> >>> parminder at itforchange.net 1/9/2007 1:21 AM >>>
> >>>>>> > Where are our coordinators? Wouldn't it be appropriate for
> >> them to
> >>>>>> > initiate action on this, e.g. develop a draft?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I apologize for being amiss on this issue after promising on
> >> 30th
> >>> last
> >>>>>> to do
> >>>>>> a draft in 3-4 days.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> A draft is enclosed for your consideration, and also pasted in
> >> the
> >>>> body
> >>>>>> of
> >>>>>> this email below.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> A couple of points about the draft.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Firstly, I have made it elaborate rather than concise - arguing
> >> the
> >>>>>> case and
> >>>>>> making a formal claim to know the present position against
> >> clear
> >>>>>> commitments, as a stakeholder of the WSIS and post WSIS
> >> process.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Secondly, between the options of considering 'enhanced
> >> cooperation'
> >>>>>> (EC) as
> >>>>>> THE required public policy process(es) spoken of in paras 60
> >> and 61
> >>> of
> >>>>>> Tunis
> >>>>>> agenda, or considering it as one of the processes which gets
> >>> discussed
> >>>>>> in
> >>>>>> more details in the subsequent parts, I have taken the latter
> >>> option.
> >>>>>> Tunis
> >>>>>> agenda can be read either way, and there can be multitude of
> >>> opinions
> >>>>>> on
> >>>>>> this issue. However, I preferred to avoid putting all our
> >> 'public
> >>>>>> policy'
> >>>>>> eggs in the EC basket. Also there is the problem that the
> >> opening
> >>> para
> >>>>>> 69
> >>>>>> that mentions EC for the first time seem to capture it in a
> >> somewhat
> >>>>>> exclusive governmental framework. The overall paras 61 however
> >> is
> >>> more
> >>>>>> multistakeholder inclusive. In any case, other paras talk
> >> about
> >>>>> > different
> >>>>>> public policy mechanisms/ processes etc for ccTLDs (63) and
> >> gTLDs
> >>>>>> (64)..
> >>>>>> Keeping EC as just one of the envisaged/possible mechanisms of
> >>> public
> >>>>>> policy
> >>>>>> also helps us to keep a way out of a situation where a
> >> slightly
> >>>>>> improved
> >>>>>> GAC, is attempted to be passed off both as the EC as well as
> >> all
> >>> that
> >>>>>> was
> >>>>>> ever meant in Tunis agenda as any kind global public policy
> >> space or
> >>>>>> process
> >>>>>> ..
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Parminder
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> (draft below, and also enclosed as attachment)
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> From the Civil Society Internet Governance Caucus
> >>>>> >
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Nitin Desai
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Special Advisor to the Secretary-General, United Nations.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Dear Mr Desai,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Wishing you a happy and fulfilling 2007!
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> The Internet Governance Caucus (IGC) would like to congratulate
> >> you
> >>>> for
> >>>>>> the
> >>>>>> very successful first meeting of the Internet Governance Forum
> >>> (IGF).
> >>>> A
> >>>>>> good
> >>>>>> amount of the credit for this goes to your personal leadership,
> >> and
> >>>>>> that of
> >>>>>> your advisory team. The first meeting of the IGF was a crucial
> >>>>>> mould-setting
> >>>>>> exercise, and we appreciate the fact that all parties
> >> approached it
> >>>>>> positively, and with due care. We have been able to set the
> >> stage
> >>> for
> >>>> a
> >>>>>> new
> >>>>>> multistakeholder exercise in global governance which is indeed
> >>>>>> path-breaking, not only in the area of governance of the
> >> Internet,
> >>> but
> >>>>>> in
> >>>>>> general as an outstanding example for future reforms in global
> >>>>>> governance.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> IGF has got firmly established as an open platform, inclusive
> >> to
> >>> all,
> >>>>>> which
> >>>>>> gives an opportunity to discuss and debate public policy
> >> issues
> >>>> related
> >>>>>> to
> >>>>>> the Internet, and explore possibilities as well as
> >> constituencies
> >>> for
> >>>>>> needed
> >>>>>> change and reform. Some of these issues can even reach high
> >> enough
> >>>>>> degree of
> >>>>>> consensus among the involved parties that can drive change on
> >> its
> >>> own
> >>>> -
> >>>>>> for
> >>>>>> instance agreements on new technology or legal standards,
> >>>>>> incorporating
> >>>>>> agreed issues of public interest, that are acceptable to all
> >>>>>> stakeholders,
> >>>>>> civil society groups, business and the governments. However,
> >> the
> >>> fact
> >>>>>> remains that most public policy processes at the IGF, at least
> >> after
> >>>>>> they
> >>>>>> reach a level of maturity of debate and deliberation in the
> >> IGF,
> >>>>>> require
> >>>>>> inputting into an appropriate political arena of global public
> >>> policy
> >>>>>> making. It is the lack of progress in this area in the post
> >> WSIS
> >>>> period
> >>>>>> that
> >>>>>> continues to cause concern to us.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> The Tunis agenda clearly recognizes 'that there are many
> >>> cross-cutting
> >>>>>> international public policy issues that require attention and
> >> are
> >>> not
> >>>>>> adequately addressed by the current mechanisms' (paragraph 60
> >> of
> >>> Tunis
> >>>>>> agenda). It further affirms, for this purpose, the 'need to
> >>> initiate,
> >>>>>> and
> >>>>>> reinforce, as appropriate, a transparent, democratic, and
> >>> multilateral
> >>>>>> process, with the participation of governments, private
> >> sector,
> >>> civil
> >>>>>> society and international organizations . (p 61). The Tunis
> >> agenda
> >>>>>> also
> >>>>>> expressly calls for 'creating an environment that facilitates
> >> this
> >>>>>> development of public policy principles' (p 70). The intent
> >> and
> >>>> mandate
> >>>>>> of
> >>>>>> the Tunis agenda in terms of the importance and urgency to
> >> proceed
> >>>> with
> >>>>>> the
> >>>>>> task of developing public policy principles for the Internet,
> >> and
> >>>>>> processes/mechanisms for their development and application, is
> >> quite
> >>>>>> evident.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> As one form or possibility for this exercise, paragraph 71 lays
> >> out
> >>>>>> such a
> >>>>>> clear mandate that it is worth quoting in full.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> The process towards enhanced cooperation, to be started by the
> >> UN
> >>>>>> Secretary-General, involving all relevant organisations by the
> >> end
> >>> of
> >>>>>> the
> >>>>>> first quarter of 2006, will involve all stakeholders in their
> >>>>>> respective
> >>>>>> roles, will proceed as quickly as possible consistent with
> >> legal
> >>>>>> process,
> >>>>>> and will be responsive to innovation. Relevant organisations
> >> should
> >>>>>> commence
> >>>>>> a process towards enhanced cooperation involving all
> >> stakeholders,
> >>>>>> proceeding as quickly as possible and responsive to innovation.
> >> The
> >>>>>> same
> >>>>>> relevant organisations shall be requested to provide annual
> >>>>>> performance
> >>>>>> reports.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> However, as we enter the year 2007, there has been no word,
> >> much
> >>> less
> >>>>> > action, on the broader issue of developing public policy
> >> principles
> >>>>>> and
> >>>>>> processes for the Internet, and specifically, the more clearly
> >>>>>> mandated
> >>>>>> issue, with timelines, of initiating the 'process towards
> >> enhanced
> >>>>>> cooperation'. As a matter of paramount global public interest,
> >> as
> >>> well
> >>>>>> as a
> >>>>>> stated commitment of the WSIS, we, the IGC, as stakeholders of
> >> the
> >>>> WSIS
> >>>>>> and
> >>>>>> post-WSIS process, request to be informed on the status of
> >> these
> >>>>>> issues, in
> >>>>>> terms of the action that has been taken, and is intended to be
> >>> taken.
> >>>>> >
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> We also wish to claim the full participation of civil society
> >> in the
> >>>>>> envisaged process of 'enhanced cooperation' and other public
> >> policy
> >>>>>> processes, which is implied and mandated in the concerned parts
> >> of
> >>> the
> >>>>>> Tunis
> >>>>>> agenda, and we request you to ensure such participation. We
> >> note
> >>> with
> >>>>>> concern that some parties have tried to claim 'enhanced
> >> cooperation'
> >>>> as
> >>>>>> a
> >>>>>> government-only process. This is completely at variance with
> >> the
> >>>>>> overall
> >>>>>> envisaged approach to public policy issues for the Internet (p
> >> 60
> >>> and
> >>>>>> 61) as
> >>>>>> well as in terms of the specific process of 'enhanced
> >> cooperation'
> >>> (p
> >>>>>> 71).
> >>>>>> We also offer our complete cooperation, and assistance as may
> >> be
> >>>>>> required by
> >>>>>> you, for initiating these processes, in order to ensure
> >>> incorporation
> >>>>>> of
> >>>>>> public interest in the development of the most powerful
> >> technologies
> >>>> of
> >>>>>> our
> >>>>>> times, that holds much promise for just and equitable social
> >> change.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Thanking you.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Sincerely
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> > -----Original Message-----
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> > From: Milton Mueller [mailto:mueller at syr.edu]
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> > Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2007 6:49 AM
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> > To: ajp at glocom.ac.jp; governance at lists.cpsr.org
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> > Subject: [governance] Action on Enhanced Cooperation, please
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> >
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> > >>> ajp at glocom.ac.jp 12/28/2006 4:17 AM >>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> > >Any thoughts on writing to Nitin Desai asking for an update
> >> on
> >>>>>> > >enhanced cooperation? And working on
> >> statements/contributions to
> >>>>>> the
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> >
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> > >February consultation? (about 6 weeks away.)
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> >
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> > I strongly agree with Adam that this is a desirable thing.
> >>> Enhanced
> >>>>>> > cooperation, no matter how bullshit a formulation it is, was
> >>>> supposed
> >>>>>> to
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> > be one of the key outcomes of WSIS, and represents a
> >> critical
> >>> point
> >>>>>> of
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> > contention between EU and USA.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> >
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> > There are (legitimate) worries about governments being
> >> passive
> >>>>>> watchers
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> > of IGF "shows", expressed by Jeanette earlier. Enhanced coop
> >> is
> >>> one
> >>>>>> of
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> > the few areas where state politics can intersect with
> >> post-WSIS
> >>>>>> Forum
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> > politics. At worst, making this inquiry may also bring us
> >> face to
> >>>>>> face
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> > with the possible truth that the govts have no intention of
> >> doing
> >>>>>> > anything and are playing games with WSIS/IGF. If so, we need
> >> to
> >>> call
> >>>>>> > their bluff
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> >
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> > Where are our coordinators? Wouldn't it be appropriate for
> >> them to
> >>>>>> > initiate action on this, e.g. develop a draft?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> >
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> > Adam has already laid out the basic outlines of what needs to
> >> be
> >>>>>> said:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> >
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> > >a letter asking for
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> > >progress/update, why aren't we being told, and we would like
> >> to
> >>> be
> >>>>>> > >involved. And cc'ing govt and others we know interested to
> >> see if
> >>>>>> > >they will also then ask the same questions might be
> >> helpful.
> >>>>>> > >
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> >
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> > ____________________________________________________________
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> > You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> > governance at lists.cpsr.org
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> > To be removed from the list, send any message to:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> > governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> >
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> > For all list information and functions, see:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> > http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
> >>>> ____________________________________________________________
> >>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
> >>>> governance at lists.cpsr.org
> >>>> To be removed from the list, send any message to:
> >>>> governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org
> >>>>
> >>>> For all list information and functions, see:
> >>>> http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
> >>> ____________________________________________________________
> >>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
> >>> governance at lists.cpsr.org
> >>> To be removed from the list, send any message to:
> >>> governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org
> >>>
> >>> For all list information and functions, see:
> >>> http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >> --
> >> >> Izumi Aizu <<
> >>
> >> Institute for HyperNetwork Society
> >> Kumon Center, Tama University
> >> * * * * *
> >> << Writing the Future of the History >>
> >> www.anr.org
> >> ____________________________________________________________
> >> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
> >> governance at lists.cpsr.org
> >> To be removed from the list, send any message to:
> >> governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org
> >>
> >> For all list information and functions, see:
> >> http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
> >
> > ____________________________________________________________
> > You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
> > governance at lists.cpsr.org
> > To be removed from the list, send any message to:
> > governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org
> >
> > For all list information and functions, see:
> > http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
> governance at lists.cpsr.org
> To be removed from the list, send any message to:
> governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org
>
> For all list information and functions, see:
> http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20070113/78ed6420/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: message-footer.txt
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20070113/78ed6420/attachment.txt>
More information about the Governance
mailing list